Philosophy as Therapy – Introduction
B.Contestabile admin@socrethics.com First version 2008 Last version 2010
|
Table of Contents
|
▪ Synonym: Therapeutic Understanding of Philosophy
▪ The term therapy implies that there exists some kind of suffering to work therapeutically with. The shortest definition of philosophy as therapy therefore is knowledge as a means to liberate from suffering.
▪ In the context of philosophy as therapy the term therapy doesn’t refer to mental diseases but to the suffering involved in daily life like accidents, defeats, natural catastrophes, crimes, (economical) wars, illnesses, aging and death. The fact that traumatic forms of suffering exist and persist is a major challenge for any attempt to construct meaning in life. The occupation with the phenomenon of suffering is (in accordance with Nichomachean ethics) not a means to an end, but an end in itself.
▪ The term therapy is usually applied to an individual or a group. Attempts to reduce suffering on the cultural level are associated with the terms political philosophy and cultural critic. But in Ancient times the boundaries between philosophy, politics and religion were fluent and therapies were imbedded in worldviews and social ideals (e.g. Stoicism, Spinoza). The separation of the disciplines began with the development of individualistic therapies (see Freud’s Philosophy of Life).
Spontaneity and control
Two kinds of suffering and corresponding kinds of therapies have to be distinguished:
▪ Suffering caused by passions. Therapies: Hellenism, Schopenhauer
▪ Suffering caused by the suppression of passions. Therapies: Nietzsche, Freud
Therapies of desire (passion) tend to be normative; therapies for emotional liberation tend to be individualistic. Both strategies have a certain survival value:
▪ The suppression of passions prevents from conflicts and violence
▪ The acting out of ones feelings prevents from becoming depressive.
Survival and non-existence
Philosophy doesn’t necessarily have to function as a tool for (genetic) survival. The discovery that suffering can be reduced by questioning the wheel of (genetic) reincarnation is at the source of Buddhism. This leads to a different classification of Philosophy as Therapy:
▪ Greek tradition: Develop a strategy for survival. Cope with suffering
▪ Buddhist tradition: Liberate from (genetic) reincarnation. Cope with non-existence.
Most contemporary interpretations of the term Philosophy as Therapy are committed to the Greek concept. To integrate the two views means living with competing goals and corresponding emotional conflicts. Precursors of integration can be found in the Hindu tradition.
Commonalities
All forms of therapy have the following characteristics in common:
▪ The interdisciplinary approach
▪ The attempt to connect academic knowledge with the practice of daily life
The search for linguistic clarity (Socrates, Wittgenstein) has a therapeutic effect and can be combined with any of the mentioned therapies.
The construction of meaning
Traumatic forms of suffering destroy most of the non-religious attempts to construct meaning in life. A possible therapeutic approach (in the tradition of Buddhism and Enlightenment) consists in exploring the deeper causes of suffering. Making the misfortunes and blows of daily life the object of introspective and scientific investigation allows getting on distance to negative emotions. The search for knowledge in one of the most relevant areas of practical life creates inter-subjective meaning.
Science
The basis of every therapy is the understanding of suffering. The prime goal is therefore the development of a contemporary theory of karma, i.e. a theory of the origination and dispersion of suffering.
▪ An analytical approach to suffering is confronted with unpleasant theses. One of them is that the degree of suffering increases with evolution and seems not to be limited. The degree of happiness increases as well, but suffering cannot be compensated by happiness across individuals.
▪ Does the cultural fight against suffering with its increasing complexity and its prolongation of lifetime lead to higher degrees of suffering (in analogy to the biological level)? The answer to this question requires analyzing the ambivalence of technological progress.
▪ Can the distribution of suffering be influenced in a long-term perspective? Will an extremely suffering minority pay the price for the progress of the majority (in analogy to the biological level)?
Philosophy
Greek skepticism started the debate concerning the justification of suffering, known as theodicy. In a contemporary philosophical debate suffering cannot be charged to a divine creator any more, but (indirectly) to all individuals who procreate. On the other hand, turning against life might be a hopeless undertaking and result in an additional kind of suffering. The situation is characterized by a moral dilemma. What is a reasonable answer to the fact that traumatic forms of suffering exist and persist?
▪ Is it compassion and alienation in the tradition of Theravada-Buddhism?
▪ Is it the non-violent promotion of ethical knowledge in the tradition of Mahajana-Buddhism?
▪ Is it political and humanitarian action in the occidental tradition?
▪ Is it technological progress?
|
▪ Philosophy as Therapy, Stan van Hooft Deakin University, Melbourne ▪ Therapeutic Understanding of Philosophy, ETH Research
|